The Last King Of Jaffna Was A Sinhala-Buddhist

By H. L. D. Mahindapala –

H. L. D. Mahindapala

Part of the crisis we are facing today was caused by either deliberately hiding the realities of history, or by political activists distorting it to suit expedient politics and partisan ideologies. Distorted history indeed played a central role in dividing the Sinhala-Tamil communities on ethnic lines. One of the main thrusts of peninsular politics was to distort Sri Lankan history and polarise the two communities to keep them apart on ethnic lines. It began with G. G. Ponnambalam who launched his political campaign in the thirties by targeting the Sinhalese and their history. He became the champion of the Tamils by delivering a nine-hour lecture to the Soulbury Commissioners in which he blamed “the Sinhala government” for “discriminating” against the Tamils. Neither he nor any of his successors who held the leadership of Jaffna stood for any progressive, liberal, socialist, or pluralistic political programmes for peaceful co-existence. They survived in politics by rousing communal passions in Jaffna against the Sinhalese. The usual litany of complaints against the Sinhalese, which began with Ponnambalam, was dismissed by the Soulbury Commissioners as stuff and nonsense, unsubstantiated by the available evidence.

But this did not stop him from attacking the Mahavamsa and Sinhala history. It is his distortions of history that caused the first Tamil-Sinhala riots in Nawalapitiya in 1939. His Sinhala rival, S. W. R. D. Bandaranaike, thanked him for giving a boost to the newly formed Sinhala Maha Sabha which was established to counter anti-Sinhala racism. Since then the anti-Sinhala racism of Jaffna politics has been the regular diet fed to the people of Jaffna. It the scapegoat on which Jaffna politicians have been riding, partly to cover up their political sins of treating their own people as pariahs unfit for human society and partly to demonise the Sinhala-Buddhists – the indispensable political tool used consistently to gain political mileage both domestically and internationally.

A common feature of Jaffna politics is the refusal to assess Sri Lankan history objectively without looking at it through the coloured lenses of either Ponnambalam, or S. J. V. Chelvanayakam. The ultimate expression of anti-Sinhala racism was enshrined as the official history of Tamils in the Vadukoddai Resolution of 1976. Subsequently, it became the standard reference point for academics, NGOs pundits, researchers, social scientist and the whole caboodle of pro-separatist, or pro-devolution ideologues. Any factual or objective analysis of history that goes counter to the authorised version of Tamil politics throws the Jaffna Tamils off balance. Schooled essentially in the locally manufactured history they are utterly confused when confronted with any critical / scientific / objective history that questions the hand-woven history that were rolled out like home-made beedi for popular consumption.

Scholars, however, are not unanimous about the Vadukoddian version of mono-causal history, its geography, or its anti-Sinhala-Buddhist ideology that led the Tamils all the way to Nandikadal. The post-Vadukoddai image of Jaffna does not conform to the recorded facts in history. Besides, claims and counter-claims have obfuscated the history misleading the followers into paths of suicidal violence. For instance, the first known settlement of migrants of S. India which began in the thirteenth century in Jaffna is labelled by scholars under different classifications. Some say its a kingdom and others refer to it as a principality or as a feudatory. The combined geographical boundaries of the north and the east, which they claim to be their exclusive domain, have no historical basis nor demographic justification (there are more Tamils living with the Sinhalese than in their so-called “homeland”), except that they were drawn by the British who centralised the administration by dividing it into regional provinces. The Sinhala kings in the south, however, considered themselves to be the overlords of the entire island. It is in keeping with this doctrine that the King of Kotte ruled Jaffna with Sapumal Kumaraya (aka, Sembaperumal), his general, as the resident ruler of Jaffna.

King Senerat of Kandy, an ex-Buddhist monk, too considered Jaffna to be a part of his kingdom and when the Portuguese defeated Sankili II in 1619, he bided his time and sent Mudliyar Atapattu, one of his kinsman, with an army of five thousand soldiers, to capture Jaffna. There were, of course, strategic and economic reasons also for invading Jaffna. The advancing Sinhala forces swept into Jaffna with the people of Jaffna rallying behind the victorious Sinhala forces who captured Jaffna by driving out the Portuguese from the land. They were holed up in the confines of their fortress in Jaffna which was under siege by the forces of Atapattu. Fr. Queroz, the leading authority of the time wrote “…. the enemy (i.e, the Sinhalese) made himself master of the Kingdom unopposed.”

“So supreme seemed to be their success that the Kandyans even “tried to collect taxes”. This was the highpoint of the invasion. The Kandyans had advanced right up to the Jaffna Fort, the enemy’s innermost defences and encamped before it on the Pachellpallai plain.” – p.276, Kandy Fights the Portuguese, The Military History of Kandyan Resistance, C. Gaston Perera’s, Vijitha Yapa Publications, 2007.) Senarat’s claim to the Jaffna kingdom was strengthened by the marriage of his two sons to the Jaffna princesses in Tanjore against the wishes of the Portuguese who feared that a marriage alliance between the two kingdoms would be a certain threat to their security and stakes.

After Jaffna was handed over to the Portuguese un der the terms of the Nallur Convention, the people of Jaffna were oppressed cruelly by the occupation army of the Portuguese. Naturally, they rallied behind the invading Kandyan forces and went on the rampage, burning the hated symbols of Portuguese Churches. The triumphant Kandyan forces were emboldened by the mass support of the population. After the defeat of Sankilli II in 1619 the people of Jaffna were happy to accept the Sinhala forces (in 1629) as liberators. Fr. Bruno wrote that the Kandyan army “was joined by the whole kingdom.” (Fr. V. Perniola, The Catholic Church in Sri Lanka, Portuguese Period. ) So technically, legally, politically and militarily Senerat established himself as the last king of Jaffna by taking over power from the Portuguese in the last battle for Jaffna. His invasion of Jaffna, his conquest of Jaffna, grabbing power from the Portuguese, his being in total command of the territory, his imposition of taxes and, above all, the mass support he got from the people of Jaffna makes him the legitimate and acknowledged king of Jaffna.

The capture of Jaffna by King Senarat in 1629 is also recorded by Captain Ribeiro who wrote : “But while our (Portuguese) army was laying waste to the whole of that (Kandyan) kingdom, the General (Constantine de Saa) was advised that the King had sent five thousand chosen men to Jafanapatao under the command of Modeliar of his Atapata, the Captain of his personal bodyguard; he knew that that kingdom and fortress were feebly garrisoned, and that Felippe de Oliviera, who had brought it under the dominion of the Portuguese, was dead.” – (p. 87, The Historic Tragedy of the Island of Ceilao, Captain Joao Ribeiro, translated by Paul E. Peiris, Asian Educational Services, New Delhi. 1999). Clearly, this indicates that King Senerat, after calculating the political situation in Jaffna , had picked the right moment to strike. It was, as indicated by Ribeiro, the weakest moment of Portuguese rule in Jaffna. Fr. Queroz too had devoted a chunk of his history to the conquest of Jaffna. Referring to Modliyar Atapattu’s expedition to Jaffna he wrote : “This was the last battle in the conquest of Jaffna.”

The invasion and capture of Jaffna by Senerat blasts the politico-legal myth that the sovereignty of Jaffna was passed on to the Portuguese by the last king Sankilli II of Jaffna and, therefore, the British should have handed back sovereignty to his descendants, the Tamils. But history records that the last king of Jaffna was Senerat, a Sinhala-Buddhist King of Kandy, and not Sankilli II, though he was last king of Aryachakravarti dynasty. As Senerat was the last king to fight the last battle over Jaffna there could be no doubt that sovereignty passed over finally from the Sinhala king to the Portuguese. The conquest of Jaffna by Senerat’s forces in 1629 negated the validity of the Nallur Convention in which Jaffna handed over power to the Portuguese in 1619. The fate of Jaffna was settled finally in “last battle” fought by Senerat and not at the Nallur Convention.

When Mudliyar Attapattu was holding Jaffna the Portuguese general Constantine de Saa had to send two columns from the south to challenge him and regain Jaffna for the Portuguese King. Even though Mudliyar Atapattu held Jaffna for a brief while, history records that sovereignty finally passed over to the Portuguese only after the defeat of Mudliyar Attapattu on Jaffna soil. The victory of Mudliyar Attapatu makes Senarat the last king of Jaffna. And the defeat of Mudliyar Atapattu establishes that sovereignty was regained by the Portuguese only after defeating him. There is serio-comic irony in this historical event : the last King of Jaffna was a Sinhalese and the last king of the Sinhalese was a Tamil. Such are the twists and turns of history which mock the pompous racial assumptions of extremists.

Accepting the historical truths as recorded by reliable eye-witnesses is indispensable to draw accurate conclusions from history. The pro-Tamil lobby had laboured indefatigably to comb every nook and corner of history to extract evidence to prove that Jaffna belongs to them exclusively. One of the main arguments is based on the Nallur Convention in which they claim that power was handed over by the Tamils to the Portuguese. From this point they trace a line of power flowing from Tamils to the Portuguese and from Portuguese to the Dutch and from the Dutch to the British. From this chain of events they conclude that the British should have handed over power to them instead of handing it over to the Sinhalese because it was the Tamils who handed over power to the Portuguese. But the historical events, as recorded by the Portuguese historians, confirm that the Sinhala King recaptured Jaffna and the decisive and final transfer power took place only after the Portuguese reclaimed Jaffna by defeating the Sinhala forces. So the ultimate transfer of power took place when the Sinhalese lost Jaffna to the Portuguese in the last battle for Jaffna in 1629 and not when the Tamils lost it to them in 1619.

The Nallur agreement signed with the Portuguese has no relevance to the transfer of power because after the conquest of Jaffna by Senarat the Nallur Agreement had no validity under the new political dispensation of the Kandyan King. The conquest of Jaffna by Senerat superseded the previous arrangements with the Tamil kings. As the last king of Jaffna it was his word that reigned supreme in the destiny of Jaffna. This emphasizes the prime necessity of establishing historical truths to prevent falsifications of history and, more importantly, to trace the proper sequence of events without hiding relevant historical facts for political gain. The validity of the Tamil claim to a separate state based on their argument that sovereignty of Jaffna was passed over to the Portuguese by the Tamil king loses legitimacy and credibility when tested against the eye-witness records of the Portuguese historians. A nation does not deserve to be divided on fictitious history.

One other point that is noteworthy is that in the officials records of the Portuguese, Dutch and the early 19th century British there wasn’t a community known as the Tamils. The Jaffna Tamils were consistently branded as Malabaris. There were no Tamils, per se, in the known records until late in the 19th century. Here is an example from the British records : “There is no part of the world where so many languages are spoken or which contains such mixture of nations, manners and religions. Besides Europeans and Cingalese, the proper native of the island, you meet scattered all over the town almost every race of Asiatic : Moors of every class, Malabars, Travancorins, Malays, Hindoos, Gentoos, Chinese, Persians, Arabians, Turks, Maldivians, Javians and Natives of all the Asiatic isles. Parsees or worshippers of fire, who would sooner have their houses burnt and themselves perish in the flames than employ any means to extinguish it. There are also a number of Africans, Cafrees, Buganese, mixed race of Africans and Asiatic; beside the half-castes, people of colour and other races which proceed from a mixture of the original ones. Each of these different class of people has its own manners, customs and language.”

This was written in 1803 by R. Perceival in his book, An Account of the Island of Ceylon, (London 1803, pp. 114-115). What is striking in Perceival’s report is the absence of Tamils in this account. The absence of a racial group established as Tamils from the early colonial records is puzzling. However, it is wrong to conclude that the Tamils were not there. Even the Mahavamsa records the prevalence of the Tamils (Demalas). The reference to Tamils comes into prominence mainly in the British records of the late 19th century, particularly after the censuses which classified the people according to races. The Portuguese and the Dutch classified them essentially as Malabaris.

In the early colonial periods, however, the influx of S, Indian migrants from Malabar and Travancore must have overshadowed the native Tamils. Besides, the “Tamil consciousness” which rides high, overdetermining current politics, could not have been in existence in the early colonial periods. As shown earlier, the records do not even recognise Tamils as a communal entity. The rise of Tamils as a political force, driven by the Saivite-casteist forces forged in its insular past, is clearly a post-British phenomenon. This development has a history of its own which has to be explored more thoroughly to disentangle the interweaving threads of north-south relations that worsened inter-ethnic relations. The rise of “Tamil consciousness”, in its most virulent form, emerging from nowhere, as it were, has been a decisive factor in the 20th century and, oddly enough, our social scientists have ignored this aspect in analysing the Tamil past that went awry.

https://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/the-last-king-of-jaffna-was-a-sinhala-buddhist/

The Mahavamsa Myth

By Prof. Nalin de Silva 

There is supposed to be a problem in Sri Lanka. It is discrimination against Tamils. As a solution it has been suggested that power should be devolved to the Northern Province and the Eastern Province, which are described as a Tamil homeland, traditional habitats etc., of the Tamils in Sri Lanka. The so-called problem had been ‘formulated’ differently over time but in essence it has been discrimination against the Tamils by the Sinhala people. It is also said that problem started after the Sinhala Only Act in 1956 and the SLFP led by the Bandaranaikes and now by Rajapaksa is responsible for creating and worsening the discriminations against the Tamils. As an answer to the important question why the Sinhala Buddhists should discriminate against the Tamils it is very often said that it is the result of Mahavamsa mindset, whatever it is. Some pundits even go to the extent of equating Mahavamsa with Thripitaka (translated as the Three Baskets) and as such Sinhala Buddhists are supposed to have Chaturpitaka (four baskets)!

Mahavamsa undoubtedly has conditioned the minds of the Sinhala people over the years and together with the Visuddhimagga and Pali commentaries supposed to be written by Ven. Buddhagosha Thera (and probably other Bhikkus from Andra Pradesh and Sri Lanka) from Andra Pradesh, with the Mahavihara Bhikkus ‘supervising’ the work, has been the main text along which Sinhala nationalism had been built in the academic world. (In fact, Visuddhimagga very much above the standard of most of the PhD theses written following the English university traditions after the nineteenth century could be considered as one of the best works done under ‘supervision’.)

The other book that has influenced the Sinhala people, mainly the common man, is the Jathaka Potha written much later. The Mahavamsa and the commentaries were written circa the 5th Century and obviously there had been some reason(s) for writing of these texts more or less during the same time. They could not have been written against the Tamils as there were no permanent Tamil residents in the country at that time. There were occasional invaders from what is at present called South India but there was no reason to write the commentaries with the assistance of Bhikkus from Andra Pradesh against Dravidian invasions. The commentaries together with Thripitaka define what can be called the Theravada Bududahama or the Bududahama of the Third Council (Sangyana) during Asoka’s time.

I prefer to call this Bududahama, Asoka Bududahama or the Bududahama of the Third Council, and the Mahavamsa that ends with the reign of Mahasen, though the book was written much later, clearly establishes the victory of Mahavihara the centre of Asoka Bududahama over Abhayagiriya, Jethavana and the other centres of what could be called non pure Asoka Bududahama. Mahasen demolished Mahavihara but later he was made to apologise to Mahavihara Bhikkus and rebuild it. Regarding Mahasen’s death, Mahavamsa says the king died after acquiring much ‘pav’ [sins] and ‘pin’ (merit). The Mahavamsa or the Vamsa of the Buddha is identified as the Vamsa of Asoka Bududahama and the book written by Mahanama Thera gives prominence to the King Asoka of Dambadiva, though it is supposed to deal with the history (Vamsakatha) of Bududahama in Sri Lanka. Mahavamsa is clearly the Vamsakatha (history) of the Asoka Bududahama, and it establishes the ‘supremacy’ of that sect over the other sects of Bududahama or other Bududahamas. However, Mahavamsa should not be considered a book of history in the western tradition as no attempt has been made to write a history of Sri Lanka or the Sinhala nation. Ideally, it should be treated as a Vamsakatha and nothing more.

Mahavamsa and the commentaries together with Thripitaka, if at all, can be considered the texts of Asoka Bududahama, the Bududahama of victors over the other Bududahamas. It appears that politically and culturally (‘doctrinally’) the Asoka Bududahama was under threat from the Madhyamaikas and Sauthranthikas not only in Sri Lanka but in Andra Pradesh and other parts of present day India, during this period, and at least in Sri Lanka the Asoka Bududahama has been able to defeat the others, though not decisively. It appears that the Asoka Bududahama decisively established its ‘supremacy’ with the revival during the time of Weliwita Sri Saranankara Sanga Raja Thera, as probably the others had died a ‘natural death’ as there was no patronage from anybody to revive those Bududahamas. The fact that there has been a book called Vargapurnikava copied during the last phase of the Sinhala kingdom reveals that other Bududahamas and Vamsakathas were existing at that time.
It can be stated that Mahavamsa, if at all, is not against Tamils or any other ethnic community, but is the result of attempts by Mahavihara Bhikkus to preserve Asoka Bududahama as against Madhyamikvada, Sauthranthikavada and Mahayana Bududahamas. The Mahavihara Bhikkus considered Asoka Bududahama as the ‘original’ Bududahama and they were determined to protect that Bududahama and Mahavamsa and the commentaries including Visuddhimagga have been written with that purpose in mind. Ven. Gnanaponika Thera in his Anatta and Nibbana, which I read in the Sinhala as translated by N T S A Senadheera, claims that Visuddhimagga was careful to ‘interpret’ Nibbana not as a Sunya Dhamma in order to distinguish Theravada (Mahavihara) from Sauthranthikas to avoid any criticisms from Mahayana sects.
It is difficult to agree with the ‘interpretation’ of Nibbana as given in Visuddhimagga and I personally would have liked to see other Bududahamas flourishing in Sri Lanka in addition to Asoka Bududahama in what may be called the Shastriya Lokaya (academia if I may use a term from the western tradition). In any event Sinhala Buddhagama as practised in Sri Lanka is not scholastic or ‘Shastriya’ Asoka Bududahama of Mahavihara and one could see the Devagama of ‘Yakshas’ and other ‘Gothras’ (not tribes in the way western academics use the term) blended with various Bududahamas taught in Abhayagiriya, Jethavana and other places. It is interesting to note that the Sinhala English Treaty of 1815 refers to Buddhagama and Devagama and not Buddhagama aYt?s such. Buddhagama and Devagama can be considered the forerunner of present day Sinhala Buddhagama, which has a history going back to more than two thousand three hundred years if one believes in Vargapurnika.
The Mahavamsa myth as propagated by the westerners, the Tamil racists, NGO pundits and the academia is itself is a myth coined by them as Mahavamsa is not a book written against the Tamils. It was the result of a quarrel between Mahavihara and the other centres such as Abhayagiriya and Jetavana and that comes to light when Mahavamsa is read with the Visuddhimagga and the commentaries, and those who should have any problem with Mahavamsa are not the Tamils but those who do not agree with Asoka Bududahama, and that again is confined to few people in the ‘Shastriyia Lokaya’.
 From Island 25 Feb 2014

"Tamilnet" site is best witness to the separatist project being lost

Dr. Susantha Goonatilleke

Tamilnet, the Internet organ of the now defeated LTTE is still banned in Sri Lanka. To access it, one has to go through proxy servers, that is, one needs to put "Tamilnet.com" in a web page like "http://proxify.com/". It would have been prudent to have blocked the site when we were at war but blocking the site now is self defeating.

This site today is the best witness to the separatist project being lost. In contrast to the time when it was edited by Taraki as the core mouthpiece of the LTTE whereby its racist claims and glorification of Prabakaran was pushed, it is now only a platform for whining and complaining. All Sri Lankans should now read it.

A few days old headline in Tamilnet is "Colombo takes control of historic Kanniyaa hot wells in Trincomalee". And behind this lies many an interesting tale. The Tamilnet refers to the Government Agent taking control of the site as an archaeological protected one and declaring that a huge billboard saying that it was built by Ravana be removed.

The hot wells referred to are part of the regular local tourist trail. During the CFA to bathe here, the LTTE were issuing tickets with its snarling Tiger emblem. There was no Ravana bill board then. There was also no Ramayana fiction being pushed by the tourist authority.
I was at the Kanniyaa site a few weeks ago and saw the offending billboard which had been put up only a few weeks previously.

The reason was that the archaeology authorities had been digging into the area and were excavating the base of a dagaba when a local Tamil resident had suddenly claimed that it was her private property and overnight had also come the Ravana/Ramayana billboard.

The direct and indirect aim of these two actions was to clearly prevent further excavation which would have revealed one more example of the truth that the Eastern Province was full of ancient Sinhalese sites.

In fact, the other site on the Trincomalee tourist trail is the kovil on the so-called Swami Rock which is actually a recent structure of the 1950s whose concrete floor has prevented the structures below being excavated.

These structures as the Portuguese documented in the 17th century were Sinhalese Buddhist ones - remains of the Gokanna Vihara. Mute remains of the latter in the form of fragments of Buddha statues are still found behind the Police Station in the Trincomalee Fort which hardly any tourists visit. A couple of decades ago a padanaghara was found nearby.

During the period of LTTE control, the traditional homeland fiction falsified the true history of the North and East. As the war has ended, many Sinhalese sites are now being discovered in the Northern and Eastern Provinces as for examples complexes in the Mullativu jungle and surprisingly dagabas in Delft Island.

The most atrocious LTTE distortion was actually done by Jaffna university-based archaeologists in closely collaborating with Peter Schalk, the Swedish LTTE propagandist with whose Uppsala University Jaffna University had a close cooperation.

Peter Schalk is now banned from Sri Lanka but his efforts have gone on. The result was an invention of a total untenable "Tamil Buddhism" restricted to Jaffna and unconnected with the Buddhist remains in the rest of the country.

The most blatant results of such inventions are some publications of Jaffna University as well as the relabelling of artefacts in the Jaffna Museum as belonging to an exclusive Jaffna based "Tamil Buddhism". These Museum artefacts were discovered primarily through a joint expedition of the Royal Asiatic Society RAS in 1917 led by Prof Paul Peiris and C Rasanayagam, the author of "Jaffna Kingdom".

There were Sinhalese inscriptions among the finds and there was no doubt in the article published by the RAS of the finds being similar to those in the rest of the country. The Archaeology Department following up on this preliminary foray started excavations in the 1960s, especially in Kandarodai (Kadurugoda Vihara of the Nam Potha) and unearthed several other artefacts which were also housed in the Jaffna Museum.

In 2005, the labels at the Museum were all changed to LTTE ideology to depict an exclusive "Tamil Buddhism" in Jaffna. This is in spite of a large amount of literature on the Buddhist history in Jaffna being connected to the rest of the island.

Recently on a visit to Jaffna, its Museum employees confided that they were persuaded to falsify the labels by two staff members of the Jaffna University. The museum comes under the Archaeology Department and this unauthorised change was both an act of cultural vandalism as well as an attempt to push LTTE propaganda. Such University staff members should not be considered academics in that they falsify facts and should not be allowed to do any excavations.

Tamilnet is today concentrating not on the past glories of the LTTE but strangely on archaeology attempting to present false history. They have recently published inscriptions claimed to be from the south of Sri Lanka which nobody in the Archaeology Department had seen. There is internal evidence that much of these false publications in the Tamilnet comes from Jaffna University personnel writing anonymously.

The names of these Jaffna University fiction writers are known and the Archaeology Department should not allow them any excavation rights. We can neither afford fiction at taxpayers’ expense nor fictional archaeology that could rekindle the LTTE.

White sahibs, Brown sahibs: tracking Dharmapala Sinhala Buddhist roots of South Indian Tamil chauvinism

White sahibs, Brown sahibs: tracking Dharmapala

Sinhala Buddhist roots of South Indian Tamil chauvinism

By Dr. Susantha Goonatilake

As for SouthIndian Tamils and Buddhism in late 19th century and early 20th century you may want to read my article “White sahibs, Brown sahibs: tracking Dharmapala” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Sri Lanka New Series Vol. LIV 2008 pp 53-136.

Below is the abstract of a paper read at the Sri Lanka sociological Association conference a few weeks ago which deals also on the same theme.

A major separatist movement in India was the Tamil chauvinist Dravidistan movement, incipient in the 1920s but influential from the 1940s to the 1960s. Its indirect offspring was the LTTE and the major Sri Lankan separatist movements beginning with the FP and the TULF. The latter’s racial targets were Sinhalese and Buddhists. But the South Indian Tamil movement itself owes it to late 19th century Sinhalese Buddhists working closely with the Indian Tamil Dalits (Untouchables). The history of the Tamil Buddhist Dalit movement which predates by nearly half a century the better-known Ambedkar movement is now being laid bare through recent Dalit publications. The Tamil Dalit movement had a close ideological cooperation with the Sinhalese 19th century Buddhist Renaissance. Dalits worked closely with Anagarika Dharmapala. They came for guidance to Sri Lanka and were received by large crowds, visited new temples like Vidyodaya and old ones like Kalaniya as well as the Chief Monks of Malwatta and Asgiriya and of the Ramanna Nikaya. They were told by these monks that Buddhist theory had no place for caste. On return to India they set up a “self respect” movement for Dalits and Tamils claiming (falsely) that they were formerly Indian Buddhists who had been put down by other castes. A Buddhist Young Men’s Association was formed with Anagarika Dharmapala. The rise of the Dravidian Tamil Buddhist movement with Sinhalese inputs resulted for example in the influential book The Essence of Buddhism with an introduction by Dharmapala. Future DMK (Dravidian) leaders like E.V. Ramasamy (Periyar) lectured at Buddhist events and identified themselves with the new Tamil Buddhist movement. But as the movement matured, it was gradually captured by a more racist Dravidian ideology and the original universal Buddhist message was soon bypassed to be turned into the precursor of South Indian Tamil ideology today.

‘Sri Lankan Tamils’ and other Tamils

by D. G. B. De Silva
The influx of South Indian labour in the 19th century was, perhaps, responsible for the search of a new identity for the earlier Tamil immigrants who had made Sri Lanka their home since they were brought here or induced to come over by the Dutch for the expansion of tobacco cultivation in the Jaffna peninsula. Spearheading this movement for a new identity were men like Mudliyar Rasanayagam and Fr. Gnanaprakasar and others who wrote the history of the Jaffna Peninsula to establish the missing ‘historical link’ for the Vellala hegemony. The historical truth that there was no link between the 17th and 18th century Vellala and other migration with evidence of early South Indian presence was ignored. Tamil historians like Indrapala who wrote history observing that there was no link between the present day Tamils and those referred to in history became unpopular. That is not what they wanted to hear.

While the groups settled in the Jaffna peninsula constituted the Vellalas, who were originally a South Indian agricultural caste who were adept in cultivating irrigated land between pastures and dry land under the Indian hierarchical system each of these types of land was utilised by a specific caste or tribe [Hutton] - such other groups like the weavers the Dutch had brought and settled at about the same time in areas like Chilaw, Mannar, Jaffna and Eastern coast were later recruited as labourers in cinnamon plantations. [See N. S. G. Kuruppu: ‘A History of the Working Class Movement in Ceylon.’]. As a result of assimilation with the Sinhalese these original weavers gained social mobility whereas in the Jaffna peninsula the caste hierarchy became even more hardened with the Vellalas, by their numbers and economic power gained from ‘tobacco gold’ becoming the dominant caste, applying a hegemonic role over other castes of slaves who were imported and the Sinhalese who became degraded and dispossessed when the lands of Vanniyas were taken over and distributed, and relegated to serfdom as agricultural and other labourers. This was the phenomenon that Hutton observed, i.e., people lower in the Indian caste hierarchy adopting same attitudes towards others below them.

The preoccupation of the Jaffna high caste Tamils were more with the labouring class of Tamils and Sinhalese who lived among them in order to perpetuate their bondage through the application of social barriers and making them dependent on living on marginal lands of the Vellala overlords from which they could be evicted at pleasure. What went on behind the cadjan curtain has hardly been studied except by an occasional Dalit writer, but not in a scholarly manner as Dr. S. J. Tambiah set about studying the Sinhalese and Buddhist organisations.

In the search of the new identity of the Jaffna Tamil, separated from his origins in South India where there were other castes dominating above them in the caste and social hierarchy, in their new home in the Jaffna peninsula the Vellalas were left alone to themselves without anyone above them to impose and apply the hegemonic role over them. The royal line had ended and the Tanjore army had returned a century or two earlier with the Portuguese occupation and the power of the Jaffna Vanniyars had been broken by the Dutch by this time.

As the Indian Census Superintendent observed, it was a case of ‘adopting exactly the same attitude as the higher castes do towards them’. The newly gained economic influence arising from tobacco sales in Tanjore and to visiting Sumatran merchants also helped them in their uncontested social mobility. Otherwise, how could there be a difference between the Sinhalese agriculturists, the ‘Goviyas’ [Koviyas] and the Vellala agriculturists from South India? Did the possession of the technology of the Persian well give them higher social status over the Sinhalese ‘goviyas’ who may have practised cultivation under the monsoonal rains or dry farming under Jaffna conditions. There is a point, however, that in the districts in South India the cultivators who were engaged in dry farming were considered lower in status to those who farmed under irrigated conditions, such as the Vellalas but did such cultural practices give them the social distinctions that the Jaffna Vellalas claimed over others, in matters like temple entry, burial, [an attempted cremation of an old woman [Dalit] led to the gunning down of a Dalit in 1944], use of public wells, seating in schools [Dalit children had to sit on the floor or be outside the school building] and observation of distance?

The upper caste Jaffna Tamils have tried to fortify their position as ‘indigenous Tamils’ by juxtaposing a time space between their claims to antiquity in the island and that of the 19th century new comers to the plantation districts and for public work, into the already existing concept of hierarchical difference and social barriers based on caste.

That claim was fortified externally, by citing an inheritance well beyond the historical space of their recorded contributory association with Sri Lanka as tobacco farmers in the 17th and 18th centuries. The inheritance claimed by them in Sri Lanka did not confine itself in space of time to the days of the Cola occupation in the 11th and 12th centuries either, of which there is undeniable historical evidence that men of fighting tribes were brought to conquer the land [not farmers]; but even went beyond to the days of periodic raids of plunder of the country by South Indian mercenaries recruited from marauding tribes in the employ of adventurers seeking fortunes. Nay, it went further beyond to an uncertain era of a mythical Ravana figuring in the Ramayana story. That the so-called Ramayana was a pure myth fabricated by Brahamins who had time to write such stories whose only historical relevance is that it portrayed the phase of Aryan expansion to the Deccan plateau and further south was of no consequence to the claim of inheritance. Nor was the absence of the Ramayana tradition in the religio-cultural scene in Sri Lanka as observed by Dr. Heinz Bechert a hindrance to it. That Ravana was a worshipper of Shiva was sufficient ground to claim that he was a Hindu and therefore ‘must be’ Tamil, if not a Vellala Tamil. That a practitioner of Shiva worship must be exclusively Tamil is the main argument. The Ravana story is bandied even by intellectuals notwithstanding that even the location of Ravana’s so-called abode Lankapura, the mountain-top city, is still a matter of serious dispute among Indian scholars and it has never been settled that it was Sri Lanka; and also that Ravana represents to this date the evil forces in the Hindu ideology and that his effigy is burnt annually at Dashra [Dasarath] festival throughout north India as a symbolic destruction of evil incarnation.

If the Vellala Tamils could claim the glorious utopian ancestry in the land that Rama won for Aryan forces with the help of tribal people, one is justified in asking if there is any reason why non-Vellala Tamils like Dalits [so-called scheduled castes] of Jaffna and the Indian Tamils in the plantations should not have a share in that claim. No time barrier separated the arrival of the South Indian ‘slaves’ for the tobacco cultivation and the arrival of the ‘Indian Tamils’ for plantation labour separated them from the arrival of the Vellalas and others by only a century or two? That is if one were to give credit to that mythical tradition.

‘Panchamars’ of Jaffna [Dalits]

If the so-called high caste Tamils of Jaffna peninsula who alone claimed to represent Tamil interests economically, socially, culturally and politically, as the refusal by the Tamil Congress led by G. G. Ponnambalam to incorporate the demands of the Minority Tamil Mahasabha in the Memorandum submitted to the Soulbury Commission on behalf of the Tamils demonstrated, that claim remained unchallenged until the LTTE and other militant groups disturbed it during the present two decades.

The Dalits were the real exploited toilers in the Jaffna peninsula whose contribution in sweat has to be recognised more than that of the Vellala landlords whose claims stand on their economic power, their sheer numbers and the claimed superiority over other Tamils. As the Census Superintendent of India [Census 1931] recorded about the depressed classes in the Madras Presidency, these communities "play a large and important part in the life of the presidency"; and it is they "who furnish the backbone of agricultural labour in the chief rice-growing districts". "In one form or another they have been the victims of an agrestic[?] Serfdom wherever they have been." He then goes on to describe how the system works. Doesn’t one see a parallel situation in the northern Province?

How is it that the ‘panchamars’ [Dalits] have been excluded from the Vellala definition of ‘human person’ as pointed to by the exposition of Arumuga Nalavar, the much celebrated Sri Lanka Tamil scholar reformist of the 19th century whose memory even the government of Sri Lanka celebrated by issuing a stamp in his honour. Ravikumar wrote that Nalavar was one who, "echoing Manu, the preceptor of the ‘Varna’ system, declared that the ‘parai’ [Dalit drum], the woman and ‘panchama’ [Dalits] are "born to be beaten". He emphasises that Nalavar is ‘just one among a large company of Jaffna Tamils who stoked castiesm and helped it take strong roots in the island’.

There may be other aspects in Arumuga Nalavar’s Tamil revivalist movement which deserved to be celebrated as a number of scholars have done through their contributions to learned journals and newspapers and the issue of a stamp by the government in his name, human rights aspects of his indictment on women and the Panchama [Dalits] raised by the ‘Dalits’ notwithstanding. The negative attitude of Arumuga Nalavar to social relationship has not been projected by any Tamil or Western scholars or writers until Ravikumar raised the issue, even that as an example but not to condemn his teachings outright. Is there any difference between Nalavar’s attitude to Dalits and women [born to be beaten like the drum] and the contemporary 19th century Englishman’s idea about the Irishman as a ‘non-person; [See my article: "Colonial Role in Tamil Expansionism", The Island, 26/6/2002], and the ideas of Western thinkers like Mirabeau in ‘L’ami des hommes’ that "Our slaves in America are a race apart, distinct from our own species," or Le Trosne’s view "I consider Nagroes simply as animals to be used for tilling the soil." Did these Western thinkers steal a page from Arumuga Nalavar or was it the other way about considering that each party was writing about the same time?

If Richard Armitage, the Deputy U.S. State Secretary during his recent visit to the island was advised on Arumuga Nalavar’s call that women and the Dalits have been born like the drum to be beaten, and that Nalavar is a celebrity among the Sri Lankan upper caste Tamils, I am certain he would have reacted even strongly on the issue of human rights and gender equality in Jaffna? Or, on the contrary, did he have an inkling of the attitude of ‘cultured’ Vellalas, as symbolised by Nalavar’s writings, not to speak of the more murderous LTTE who ‘spared no injury to bone and limb,’ when he demanded the observance of democratic rights, human rights and gender equality in his statements made in Kilinochchi and later in his press briefing in Colombo?

Nalavar’s indictment is a paradox that one has to face considering that Tamil people, at least those in India, who are the inheritors of the tradition that produced the great work "Tiru Kural" of which any nation could be justly feel proud. An Englishman who was a vehement critic of the Tamil people for their disposition wrote in the ‘Kokilai’ Tamil/English newspaper published in the 19th century [Please look up in the National Archives] that any people who could have produced the ‘Kural’ must surely find a place among the cultured people of the world. The significance of the statement is that the observation was made by a person who was no admirer of the Tamil people. How does one account for the paradox? Isn’t the ‘fine flower of humanity’. the Chun-tzu, if I may use that Confucian term, contained in the ‘Tiru Kural’ drowned by calls not just to discriminate but use violence against man and woman, even one who shares the same speech, not to speak of others? Was that the upper caste Sri Lankan Tamil contribution to thoughts on human dignity?

As Ravikumar observed on the Tamil armed struggle, the genesis of the problem goes back to earlier times. He quoted Nalavar’s writings and those of others as laying the foundation for such a situation by helping to create not only a climate of discrimination but also preaching the legitimisation of violence against a section of the Tamil community [and implicitly against women]. As such, he sees in the writings of Nalavar and others the very genesis of the Tamil violence against man and women. In the face of this even the more recent Tissamaharama doctrine would pale into insignificance. But there were apologists for the latter as there might be those who justify Nalavar’s.

Ravikumar quotes the gunning down in 1944 of a Dalit at the attempted cremation of an old woman of his community at the Villoonri cremation grounds in Jaffna as an early manifestation of violence following the Arumuga Nalavar doctrine. How serious the situation in Jaffna even today is, could be seen from the fact that even Ravikumar had to write under what appears to be a pseudonym! That is despite the seeming demolition of the Vellala hegemony under the LTTE dispensation. Ravikumar questions how the situation would develop under a LTTE hegemony. His observations were quoted in Part I of this article.

The writer observes further that "increased participation of Dalits and women in the armed struggle had the paradoxical effect of loosening some of the more rigid structures of Hindu society that are incompatible with the flexibility required by armed combat; but this did not lead to Dalit issues being addressed in any formal or concrete sense. The changes that have taken place are merely pragmatic adaptations dictated by necessity. Even so, caste Tamils, who see themselves as the sole representatives of all Tamils, are uncomfortable with this new state of affairs since they fear that the rigid rules of subordination will be permanently breached. As if to reinforce the orthodoxy, while limited social change has been taking place in the Sri Lankan ‘Tamil homeland’, emigre caste Tamils have reinforced caste distinctions in full in their adopted countries."

Arumuga Nalavar was a product of his time advocating the hierarchical system within the Jaffna society and as the commentaries on him show, the one responsible for Tamil cultural and social revival. His teaching have been accepted like the Thesawallamai as the law of the Jaffna society, despite, in the final analysis, elements of discrimination, hatred and violence constitute some of is significant features. In terms of Ravikumar’s analyses one is to understand that when the Tamil people of Jaffna and the Tamil Diaspora started cheering the ‘boys’ for violence and mayhem it was nothing strange as the Tamil psyche had been nurtured in the Nalavar tradition. Respected leaders with academic excellence like Professor Sunderalingam turned politician were in the lead of the discriminatory temple entry prohibition movement against the Dalits, as the despicable Nallur temple affair showed. And one talk about human right elsewhere! Other politicians like G. G. Ponnambalam rejected the demands of the Minority Tamils even in the face of the need to take joint action to submit the Tamil point of view to the Soulbury Commissioners. He declined to include the demands made in the Memorandum of the Minority Tamil Mahasabha to accept issues concerning eduction, professional rights and eradication of untouchability which compelled the Minority Tamil Mahasabha to submit its own separate Memorandum to the Soulbury Commissioners.

privileges to the upper caste Tamils and their right to discriminate and use violence against a section of ‘Tamil speaking people’ that they were ready to forego a common stand on the constitutional issue. Like the Irishmen and Negroes in the 18th and 19th centuries, the ‘Minority Tamils’ seemed to them to no more than ‘no-persons.’ Negroes were called ‘animals to be used to till the soil,’ and here the ‘Panchamars’ and women are claimed to be "born to be beaten." Is there any difference in the mind-set?

But, Arumuga Nalavar is a much respected reformer in the upper caste Tamil mind. On the contrary, the Tamil scholars and writers as well as Western scholars have castigated Anagarika Dharmapala among the Sinhalese as the arch Sinhala chauvinist. In response to Tamil propaganda his name has entered the records as the progenitor of "Sinhalese chauvinism" in the Chancelleries of Western countries - that includes the European Union and clarifications were sought from me while I represented this country in Europe. There is no record that Dharmapala preached violence or tried to legitimise it against a section of the community, the least of his own, or any one else. His thoughts were deeply immersed in Buddhism of which he was a leading advocate. Even his attacks on aping alien social values and customs did not penetrate the Sinhalese elite. His audiences were in ‘Maria-kade’ in Maradana as the police records show. Even Ponnambalam Ramanathan making a plea to the Governor to let him return to the island on health grounds made the observation that he had no following in the country. Dharmapala’s teachings began to have a force more after his death than when he was alive. If he spoke of the manner the Chettiyars fleeced the Sinhalese he was speaking the truth. As a little child I was puzzled as to how the Chettinad Corporation had come to possess two large rubber plantations in my village, the local owner of which [she was not a Sinhalese either], as my mother used to tell me, had died a pauper in a drain in the nearby town. Dharmapala castigated the upper class Sinhalese for aping the foreigners. That is the type of the lady owner of the properties in my village who, as my mother had seen, changed her horses every month in competition with ‘Rajapaksa boys of Balapitiya’, [as my mother referred to them] whose life-style and mannerism against imitating which, Tamil leaders like Ananda Coomaraswamy and Ponnambalam Ramanathan advised the Sinhalese leadership.

As I quoted in an earlier essay, the Tamil chieftains themselves told Governor McCullum in Durbar [1908] that the Jaffna Tamil was no pioneer; that if he ventured out of his village all that he wanted was to make as much money as possible and return. So, why blame Dharmapala [see S. J. Tambiah: ‘Buddhism Betrayed’] if he repeated this observation? Of course, Tambiah was guided by some Sinhalese historians who overlooked the need to make comparisons in evaluating Anagarika, whose expositions have to be contrasted with that of Nalavar, the latter of whose teachings have had a profound impact on the psyche’ of caste Tamils.

[I had no intention of wilfully downgrading Arumuga Nalavar or Anagarika Dharmapala. Any unfavourable references to the respective roles they played in respect of their respective cultures and communities are for the sake of critical analysis of social issues of the times and undertaken in the spirit, as Dr. Tambiah said, that there could be multiple discourses in the discussion of any subject. May I be forgiven if I have overstepped my bounds in the references to these personalities].
(Concluded)

Educating Jeremy Page

Educating Jeremy Page

By Sudharshan Seneviratne
Professor of Archaeology, University of Peradeniya
Director-General, Central Cultural Fund

(This article is placed before public knowledge in an effort to rectify erroneous and callous reporting and not for purposes of engaging in a public debate. As much as the reader is free to express his or her views on this subject, the author will not respond to supporting or opposing views any further).

Time and again the ‘Empire Strikes Back’, both, literally and metaphorically! Throughout the Modern Period, the long arm of Colonialism visited and continues to revisit lands distantly located from its metropolis in various forms – as a conquering power, crusading hero, paternal benefactor and even magnanimous peace maker with a bleeding-heart!! Its modus operandi is multi faceted. They range from direct coaxing through their own agencies to the use of multi nationals and the articulation of ideas and ideology through a section of its print and electronic media - which literally functions as the Fifth Column (apologies to General Franco) of the Post Colonial Metropolitan states.

I do not wish to concern myself with innumerable instances of negative reporting carried out by a section of the western media in the past few decades on South Asia in general and Sri Lanka in particular - a body of world literature that is well known and extensively discussed. My concern is about a recent article by Mr. Jeremy Page (JP) titled Archaeology sparks new conflict between Sri Lankan Tamils and Sinhalese, published in (London) The Times on April 6 2010.

My response, done in the capacity of an archaeologist-historian, is to place before public knowledge the actual information provided by the present writer to JP, who in turn ‘forgot’ to record it in his article and the ideological justification that subverts information, which negates good reporting.

‘Ideology of misery’

Section of the First World media makes it its business, quite literally, to seek out ‘Information of disaster and misery’. If the said information is not in existence it then becomes their sanctified professional endeavor to create such information or blow a situation out of proportion, especially in the developing countries. It is then peppered it with inherent biases and prejudices compromising all decent standards of reporting and of human values. Such sentiments and activism never respects the long term consequences of sowing disharmony and divisions in society leading to further disasters and misery. This, in fact, is the classic art of creating misery, thriving in that misery and then posing themselves as the redeemer of misery. While one recognizes the service done by a section of the International media disseminating value-added information on humane concerns to the world at large, the track record of a section of the Western media is punctuated with dismal situations perpetuating conflict and dissension. Bad reporting, factual misinterpretation, subversion of information, doctoring of data and the application of double standards tends to negate whatever credibility any media house had crowned itself for good practice over the centuries. One expects a journalist to seek out facts and present them for the public to decide. This is expected to be done without framing such information within the mental rubric of pre conceived notions, biases, prejudices and even ignorance of the reporter.

There is a compulsive effort on the part of JP to psychologically condition the reader, especially his western audience, the Tamil-speaking community in Sri Lanka and the diapora before the media ambush. It essentially perpetuates the notion of communal identities as water-tight compartments and that there is a sustained competing interest between these two. (JP seems to have a memory loss about the vertical division between the North and East and the lost community in the tea plantations.) His argument then follows the logic of presenting a section of the population in Sri Lanka as the oppressed and the other as the oppressor, not based on class but on ethnicity. JP then moves on to tools of oppression and presents archaeological heritage as one such medium. His selection of words and construction of sentences is reminiscent of the Colonial mind-set with a mission to racialise, divide and rule, mythologize and hegemonise. Hegemony here is the authority to ‘order information’ - information that sets the benchmark by a section of the Western media to the world. Finally, he unfolds the underlying message of the ‘conspiracy theory’ and ‘persecution psyche’. Implicit in this message is, after the recently concluded war against terrorism in Sri Lanka, the emergence of a new wave of cultural colonialism using archaeology and heritage as a facade.

The ease with which JP quotes the words of individuals in the construction of his story (contextually disjointed though) and his pre conceived biases and prejudices are most evident in the following lines (emphasis mine): "….the army – recruited from the Sinhalese Buddhist majority; …..the area had been populated for centuries by the ethnic Tamil minority, which is mostly Hindu; …. part of plan to "rediscover" Buddhist sites;…others want more Tamil archaeologists involved as well as foreign experts or the UN to ensure that the work is objective; President Rajapaksa, the country’s ethnic Sinhalese leader; …to colonize the area, to show it belongs to the Sinhalese; …Environment Minister and his approval is required to excavate and protect sites;…Sinhala chauvinism that ultimately drove the Tigers to launch their armed struggle;… many Tamil archaeologists fled into exile overseas; …declined to be identified for fear of reprisals;… said one Tamil historian overseas, who did not want to be identified for fear of endangering relatives in Sri Lanka. Foreign archaeologists …say that the country …needs to move past the ethnic issue! In addition, JP must also rectify factual errors in his article. For instance; license to excavate or explore archaeological sites is given by the Director General of Archaeology and not by the Minister for Environment; it is Sigiriya and not Polonnaruwa that is famous for its frescoes; the last few kings of Kandy were of South Indian origin. He even identifies the LTTE as ‘rebels’!

For JP his interviews with Tamil speaking scholars and some local overseas individuals (probably from the diaspora) become a definitive bench-mark substantiating his philosophy. He even finds one British archaeologist credible enough to drive home his point. Information provided by the ‘other’, whom JP identifies as ‘Government Archaeologists’ – meaning myself and Dr. Senarath Dissanayake (Director General, Archaeology Department) is of little consequence to his central theory. The information provided by us is wilted down to about 11 sentences in the whole article! Perhaps, it did not fit in to the larger canvass of his persecution psyche and conspiracy cum misery theory! My discussion with JP on two occasions, which lasted for nearly forty five minutes, is reduced to six lines in all, and that too giving the words a different slant on the President of Sri Lanka. Most of the details I outlined about the on going work by the Central Cultural Fund (CCF) using Heritage for Conflict Resolution and Peace Education are not featured even in a single line! It is therefore necessary to place before public knowledge some facts that were not printed by JP and in turn question his own parochialisms and the credibility of his reporting as well.

Contextualizing parochialism

If Mr. Page expects a miracle that makes people forget overnight the terrible incidents of the war and factors leading to that war, he is quite obviously on the wrong planet. As much as Sri Lanka will not have a ‘Truth Commission’ in the lines of South Africa (even there, has black or white apartheid ended?) a slow process of reconciliation is on track in Sri Lanka and this must be supported and nurtured in order to counter and dilute parochialisms that were always prevalent and yet prevail within sections of the Tamil speaking as well as Sinhala speaking communities. Please cite any country and community that does not have parochialisms and inherent racisms or sectional ideologies. Try the United Kingdom! One must understand that in contemporary times the archaeologist or historian has to resolve his or her professional status with ‘competing interest’ of parochial individuals and organizations anywhere in the world.

Post war scenario has placed Sri Lanka at cross roads. Whether we venture along the old destructive, parochial and confrontational path or alternatively along a path of trust, understanding and accommodation that are critical to the long term sustenance of the social fabric of this island society. This is precisely why when activities are underway – even in a limited way – to change the inward looking parochial mind set, working together on shared heritage, brining back the next generation to appreciate the wonderful diversity and plurality of this country, one must not undermine this process by appealing again and again to the primordial tribal sentiments to ignite another round of confrontations that will foster untold misery on all communities. I personally experienced the warm reception accorded to us by the teaching staff and students of University of Jaffna recently, which was an emotional experience to all of us. There was the warmth of human beings reaching out to each other devoid of any inhibitions or reservations and above all an expression of mutual respect and cordiality.

JP has not grasped the history of Sri Lanka and the essentials of the past that were read in relation to identities through Colonial and Nationalist historiography. It is easy to pick up the Colonial mind set of the Orientalist in such writings. The ideological justification for the existence of the Colonial regime was inscribed in Colonial historiography nurtured in the traditions of antiquarianism and Orientalism. They romanticized the Mediterranean Classical civilization and juxtaposed it with the barbaric cultures located to the east of its domain. This tunnel view was extended to the colonial empire in categorizing the Orient as static, despotic and backward. The White Mans’ Burden to civilize the uncivilized was carried out with great zeal and conviction. They invented the ‘Martial Races’ and the myth of the Aryan and Dravidian races including a North – South dichotomy equating physical zones with the imagined ‘racial’ habitat and provided archaeological, anthropological and historical ‘evidence’ justifying the existence of their ‘imagined communities’. Some were superior and others inferior races. The proximity to the Colonial Master (having so called ‘Aryan’ physical features) provided a particular ‘race’ and region with superior status vis a vis the other. This Colonial historiographic baggage completed with imagined races, ‘homeland’ theories and the equation of ancient material culture with racial identities was imposed on the Brown Mans’ shoulders in the late Colonial and post Colonial periods in South Asia. This was to be the ideology of radical nationalism and racism particularly in South Asia. It is common sense knowledge that this historical mindset and the baggage of identities bestowed upon us by Colonialism cannot disappear overnight and haunts us yet as the events in India and Sri Lanka unfold even in contemporary times.

Following a near four hundred years of Colonial occupation and a thirty year war, problems of globalization including aggressive evangelical movements’ one must understand issues of identity formation, fears of cultural dilution and even social and class dislocation that is common to any community that has undergone such a traumatic experience and their response to it. The uses and misuses of history by almost every nation and every country in the world, including Sri Lanka, have been discussed in our previous writings and published locally and internationally. We have been working for over two decades towards understanding diversity, shared culture and plurality under very volatile and difficult circumstances facing a barrage of threats and criticisms from racist elements on both sides of the fence. Even under such trying circumstances, young school children and undergraduates of various ethnic and religious origins (a majority of them as Mr. Page would call ‘Sinhala-Buddhist’) participated with absolute conviction and resolution in programs on cultural plurality and shared culture. It is through their discussions, debates, exhibitions, publications and even poetry writing that we were able to evolve the concept known as Heritage for Conflict Resolution. This concept in its definitive form was presented by us in 2007 at Kathmandu under the title People to People Connectivity and Peace Interaction: Redefining Heritage for Conflict Resolution (Published by the Embassy of Sri Lanka. Kathmandu).

In my own writings in the past I have been strongly critical of state sponsored organizations for its parochialism. Two wrongs do not make a right. As much as there are individuals and organizations that subscribe to parochial views in the south Mr. Page seems to forget the subversion of history carried out in the north and east where the LTTE fine tuned that process consolidating parochial identities on the one hand and simultaneously carrying out ethnic cleansing consolidating its ideology of a mono culture or the Dravidian race on the other. JP claims that "many Tamil archaeologists fled into exile overseas". He may wish to be educated that some brilliant historians and archaeologists of Jaffna University fled this country when the LTTE forced them to rewrite the history of the Tamil speaking people from their point of view. In his most valued book (The Evolution of an Ethnic Identity. 2005) Professor K. Indrapala inscribed the following moving dedication "To the innocents who lost their lives as a direct consequence of misinterpretation of history" which is a must read line by all blood-thirsty social fascists in any community. These scholars did not accept parochialism and the falsification of history. One cannot sweep under the carpet the lives of Rajini Tiranagama, Neelan Thiruchelvam and Laksman Kadirgamar (to mention a few) that were permanently lost to the Tamil-speaking community when they were physically eliminated by the LTTE.

In this sense JP’s statement that it is "Sinhala chauvinism that ultimately drove the Tigers to launch their armed struggle" is a simple reduction of a complex historical problem into one line and simultaneously missing out several chapters in the history of Colonialism and post Colonial racist nationalism leading to such an unfortunate mind set in this island.

In our recent studies, we have emphasized the need to de-mythologize such parochial identities (in the south or north Sri Lanka) and the need to have an objective view of historical processes. The ground realities of the sub continental situation also demand that scholarly studies in reading the past must be devoid of parochialism, especially for the purpose educating the next generation of identities and its underlying social ideology. Humane and socially aware intellectuals must proceed beyond the narrow confines of the mere exercise of the academic. It calls for a critical examination of the untold misery caused by ethnic conflict in the former colonies of Britain and post Communist countries of Europe. It is also their social responsibility to provide the society at large with an alternative strategy for social change against a self-destructive path taken by social fascism dislocating historically evolved social systems in South Asia, or for that matter those found elsewhere in the world.

In this connection, there are two fundamental issues that need to be answered. First, at what point of time do individuals, groups or organizations stand up and begin to think of remedial strategies to rectify the wrongs and injustices in reading the past? Second, as much as one respects ones own heritage inherited from birth, it is an imperative and social responsibility to respect the heritage of one’s neighbour and in the context of Sri Lanka (as well as most countries) appreciate diversity and the shared culture that is historically endowed to us - which is indeed a living reality.

Given below is a long list of remedial strategies that have been applied in our individual capacity and through government agencies leading to inclusiveness. Most activities of the Central Cultural Fund in the past two years were carried out with the knowledge and directives of the President Mahinda Rajapaksa.

CCF and inclusiveness

Well before the war ended professional archaeologists were looking at remedial strategies in the application of non-parochial and professional archaeology in Sri Lanka. A team led by Dr. Siran Deraniyagala (former Director General of Archaeology) formulated the National Archaeology Policy under the aegis of the Archaeology Department of Sri Lanka, which was officially enacted in 2006 by an Act of Parliament. Its policy implementation statement notes the following in Section 3.iv (my emphasis):

The programs and related projects for achieving the above-mentioned objectives require to be formulated as a master plan on short-, medium- and long-term bases. It shall be reviewed, and revised if necessary, once every three years, or as the need arises. In order to eliminate parochial bias, the review panel will consist of Sri Lankan and international professional archaeologists of proven competence. Codes of practice for implementing the master plan shall be formulated.These will be reviewed, and revised if necessary, once every five years or as the need arises.

Following this, the CCF unfolded its year 20/20 work program at an official ceremony known as Heritage Excellence 2007. The mission statement to the next generation of archaeologist announced at that program read:

"The science of archaeology is problem-oriented and issue-related. It is essentially a multi disciplinary study investigating, documenting, interpreting and presenting human expressions, experiences and behavior patterns of the past to its rightful inheritors, the next generation. The archaeologist investigating the past is a scientist who is objective, unbiased and unprejudiced. Above all, an archaeologist is a humanist and social activist who does not fear the past or compromises the future".

At the same program the CCF also redefined heritage and its parameters for related futuristic activities. Heritage was situated beyond culture per se. In this redefinition heritage came to be based on four integral components - Environment, Culture, and Knowledge from the past and the Next Generation. The CCF since then has undertaken a series of activities and has left behind a permanent bench-mark for pockets good practice on heritage management especially disseminating professional standards and information to the next generation devoid of parochialisms.

Enumerated blow is a list of such activities, also mentioned in my conversation with Mr. Page, that were disregarded in his article.

* The CCF was involved in the Galle heritage city conservation program since 2005 with Netherlands funding. It preserved relics of the Colonial culture devoid of parochialism. The CCF was presented with the Asia-Pacific Award for excellence by UNESCO for its high quality conservation of the Dutch Reformed Church in Galle.

* In 2007 the CCF completed the multi religious museum at Kataragama. At the inaugural ceremony the President emphasized the significance of Kataragama as a place of convergence for different cultures and religions. The significance of and the Pilgrims Route or Pada yatra originating from the north reaching Kataragama was remembered as a medium of connectivity and shared culture. (The Pada Yatra is now reviewed to be listed as a World Heritage under Intangible Heritage).

* In 2008 the Cabinet of Ministers passed the mandatory rule of adhering to all three languages in all government notices. Based on that directive, all display panels at Museums managed by the CCF since 2007 are presented in the Sinhala, Tamil and English languages. (Until then most of the panels were only in the Sinhala language).

* In 2008 the Cabinet of Ministers gave a directive to list all heritage sites important to all religious groups and prioritize their development for the pilgrims and tourists. The CCF initiated cultural mapping and commenced data gathering from the Provincial Councils.

* In 2009 a secular museum was established (with Japanese funding) at the Sigiriya World Heritage site, which was inaugurated by the President.

* In 2010 the Galle Marine Archaeology Museum was inaugurated by the President. This museum is a show piece of the diversity expressed in the culture of this island. Its presentations celebrate all diverse religions, cultures, languages and ethnicities that peopled this island. The introduction to the souvenir presented to the President at that occasion carried the following lines: "Sri Lanka was peopled by periodic community intrusions and interactions since the Stone Age resulting in the introduction of a variety of ideas, technological traditions, dialects, and belief systems into this island. The central location of Sri Lanka in the Indian Ocean Rim on the one hand and its centrality between two World systems to the West and the East of the Indian Ocean on the other, provides a unique representation of the world culture blended in the ethos of this island society. As a consequence, the cultural landscape of Sri Lanka also represents a habitat of multicultural and varied biological identities. The Sri Lankan mosaic, coloured by a vivid multi-cultural, multi-ethnic island society and nurtured by a rich cultural legacy inherited from the past, is best represented in an encapsulated version in the Maritime Archaeology Museum at Galle. This museum is the first of its kind in the SAARC region showcasing the oceanic heritage of an island society. The unique display in this museum presents three thousand years of trans-oceanic connectivity and the cultural plurality of Sri Lanka. Archaeological objects, dioramas, beautifully designed tri-lingual panels, electronic and visual presentations unfold the rich multi-cultural inheritance of this island. The narration unfolds itself into different facets of human experiences and expressions associated with religio-cultural aspects and socio-economic interactions highlighting a multitude of impacting factors shaping the personality of this island society from the Pre Historic to the Colonial Period. It is indeed the privilege of the Central Cultural Fund, the Custodian organization of UNESCO declared World Heritage Sites, to present the Maritime Archaeology Museum as another value-added facet of the World Heritage Site of Galle and as a gift to humanity!"

* President’s directive to list Hindu and other religious sites as UNESCO declared World Heritage sites. The UNESCO – Sri Lanka Commission has already chartered a plan to incorporate Munneshwaram (Chilaw), Tiruketishvaram (Mannar), Koneshwaram (Trincomalee) and Nakuleshwaram(Point Pedro) as Ports & Kovil complex to be listed as World Heritage sites. Discussions initiated by the Sri Lanka – UNESCO Commission are already underway, with the participation of several Tamil speaking scholars and academics.

* Board of Management of the CCF (Chaired by the Prime Minister) ratified the proposal naming Polonnaruwa as an Icon site for multi-cultural Presentation. This is the first time a UNESCO World Heritage Site has been named in definite terms for its character representing diversity. (Polonnaruwa has the greatest concentration of Hindu and Buddhist sites in one single complex in the whole of South Asia). The project proposal prepared by the CCF to conserve the Shiva Devale is now ready to be submitted for overseas funding.

* Directive given to incorporate staff and students of the Universities of North and East in archaeological/heritage work. Under this program a. Archaeological Department has already invited the Professor of Archaeology at Jaffna University to be consultant to the Conservation Project at the Jaffna Fort and the participation of students of that Department in the said conservation. b. The Central Cultural Fund (CCF) undertook a capacity building program in Training the Trainers at Jaffna University in March 2010 with UNESCO assistance in order to train heritage managers who will manage the heritage sites in the North and East. c. Heritage books gifted to the Department of Archaeology, University of Jaffna by the CCF.

* Diaspora tourism initiative taken up by the CCF to receive all Sri Lankan origin visitors at the World Heritage Sites and the plan to publish additional books in Sinhala, Tamil and English with children arriving from overseas as the primary target group.

* Completion of the report on North East Coastal Development Project in 2009 which recorded all heritage sitesand multi cultural communities and their cultural practices (both tangible and intangible heritage) for tourism development.

* Nurturing UNESCO School Clubs in Kandy by the CCF for programs on cultural diversity and shared cultures. These school clubs are made up of different denomination and government schools and they join together for programs understanding diversity, heritage conservation and peace education.

* An illustrated catalogue of all Hindu monuments, art and sculpture found at the World Heritage sites in Sri Lanka is under preparation by the CCF.

Mr. Page was informed of most of these aspects carried out by or through the CCF, a government agency, not to mention such work the writer has initiated for over two decades in his personal capacity (as a University academic) towards fostering greater understanding among communities. In this connection, among other such activities, I wish to make a special note of my personal involvement with the Institute of Social Development in Kandy in setting up a Museum depicting the history of Plantation Workers (located near Gampola) and also reviving the Kotthu dance tradition that was fast disappearing. Here is a Tamil-speaking community forgotten by the Western media and the diaspora alike. In 2005, the present writer with the assistance of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, coordinated by Ambassador Sumith Nakandala, carried out a study tour for 12 research officers of the CCF in South India as an exposure to the Shared Culture between Sri Lanka and South India, which is considered as the ‘other’ and the ‘enemy region’ in our history books. May I now question where parochial Buddhist archaeology comes into the agenda of all what the CCF has done in the period immediately before the war ended and in the post war period and how and why Mr. Page considered the above information irrelevant to his article?

The TamilNet in its addendum to JP’s article (on April 10) notes that the present writer "…is now put to implement Colombo’s agenda in subtle ways, was the comment heard in the sidewalks". Conversely, a section of the diaspora and its media, who enjoy the comforts of the First World must come to terms with the fact that there are individuals and organizations in the North and South of Sri Lanka who oppose a totalitarian social fascist system of governance and genuinely believe in inclusiveness, shared culture and co existence. If the above activities I have enumerated represent a ‘hidden agenda’, I then rest my case!

Legitimate Tamil national grievances & Tamil homeland?

Sri Lanka Guardian, Thursday, September 17, 2009 Leave a Comment

"No country in the world has a pure blooded nation or race. Mankind often migrates and merges mentally and physically with the host nation. This to a certain extent enhances the biological infrastructure of a nation."
_________________

(September 17, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) Within the Island Country identified as Sri Lanka the rhetoric about “Tamil grievances”, “Tamil homeland struggle”, “Tamil aspirations”, “Tamil language”, “Tamil rights”, “political solution for Tamils”, “Tamil devolution”, “Tamil national citizenship”, “13th Amendment for Tamil nationality”, are about total Tamilization. This heap of words are justifications of a Tamil country.

Hence, is SL the Tamil national country? Or is there a separate Tamil country within SL? Every country is owned and upheld by a single sovereign “nation”. Nation are the indigenous people with their common language and culture, who also built the civilization. These indigenous people firstly identified as a race. People on earth are known to be of different races. For various reasons, some people of these races migrated to foreign lands leaving their indigenous abode and merged with races of new pastures. Later, these races evolved into nations and the lands became countries. Hence, most countries were formed with the birth of nations.

Sri Lanka nation & Country?

If SL is the Tamil country it must bear the Tamil name. If not who are the SL nation? As discussed earlier a nation lived with its common language and culture. But no nation, language and culture called SL in existence anywhere. The Nation of SL are its indigenous Hela people whose name corrupted later to Sinhela. The tiny island of the highly ancient Hela Nation is named as S.Lanka. The Hela Nation at length suffered torture and massacres from barbarous land robbers and terrorists. The name Lanka is an artificial name coined by foreigners to Heladiva (island of Helas). In addition, Hela was corrupted to Sin+Hela= Sinhela and Sinhala.

All these national violations committed against the Hela Nation, could have been corrected after 1948 independence from the then British land robbers and terrorists, if they did not hand over the country purposely to an anti-national clique. By naming Lanka a trap was set up for the non indigenous Tamil minority of Tamil Nadu national origin to push for an attempt to make Heladiva a second Tamil Nadu and genocide of the Hela Nation, with the collusion of 70 million Tamil kin from Tamil Nadu.

Justifiable place for Tamil national rights

If there is a nation called Tamil in this world, their motherland within this tiny Heladiva? There cannot be two nations in one country. For some reason, if the Tamil motherland is within Heladiva, then their demand for separation must be given today. The blatantly self-evident fact that Tamil Nadu (Tamil Country) as the 70 million indigenous Tamil country is situated within the Indian subcontinent. This is direct proof that Heladiva is the Island Country of the Hela Nation. Below is the undisputable geographical fact:-

14 million Hela Nation is small but the Hela island is a sovereign country. Although, the Tamil national country is Tamil Nadu with vast 70 million Tamil nation, it is only the Tamil Federal State within the Indian subcontinent. Over 30 million more Tamils are settled in many host countries of the world including Heladiva. Altogether, a massive world population of over 100 million Tamils cannot gain independence for their country is their legitimate grievance, hence, Tamil Nadu is their Tamil homeland and nowhere else.

Global Tamil conspiracy

Earlier attempts to free Tamil Nadu failed and the Tamil leadership realised their inability to confront the Indian subcontinent government, so they initiated their kin settled in Malaysia to demand a Tamil homeland there but it was nipped in the bud by Malaysia. During this time Tamil leadership heard from their Tamil kin in then Ceylon was run by pro-Tamil rulers and the going was good and ripe for Tamil national demands. Since then, the global Tamil strategy is first to capture the Island Country, and secondly to link with Tamil Nadu for total independence.

Invasion by migration

Since independence in 1948, as most rulers had Tamil ancestral links, they set up the “Lanka” plot and began dishing out alien-national rights to non indigenous minorities, which no national country in the world has prescribed. In broad day light our Hela National rights were continued to be violated but as the rulers had Sinhala names, no one suspected them. As foreign Tamil nationalism started thriving, Hela Nation got downtrodden into another community and majority sans Nationhood. North and eastern areas of Heladiva were Tamilized in violation of the Hela National Sovereignty. Sovereign Hela areas and villages were swamped and the people of Hela nation were massacred by a foreign national Tamil minority. What so far happened was worse than terror but an undercover invasion and genocide against the tiny Hela Nation.

Our Hela nationality faced the barbaric threat of foreign Dravida and Tamilians over a long period. This constant crime of land robbing and terror still does not allow us to raise our head as the NATION we are in our indigenous national motherland. These uncouth elements are now on a shameless world campaign of fraud attempting to show the crimes against us by converting into a right. Tamil country of Tamil Nadu situated north of our head is a constant menace that we should be in readiness at all times.

Justice for the Hela Nation

Over 1,000 years unrefined Dravida stock has obstructed in enjoying our fundamental human right of living our national world and indigenous heritage as a separate nation of the world. The first step for our national resurgence is to spread the trampled seed of wholesome national awareness to germinate national goodwill. This gain and joy will moisten the nation with ever flowing fountain of justice. This will cure the destructive cancer of egoism, to enhance our inviolable national sovereignty to sit on its due throne and live in national self esteem to walk tall in the world among rest of the nations.

Identify the enemies

1) Those known as black-whites straining to become Westerners, nullifying own natural identity, slaves to money who even sell the country and live only to consume.

2) Past misfortune forced into religions thus shut off from wisdom and mind building, derailed from one’s natural culture and civilisation to become traitors.

3) Addicted to party politics as if its heritage and never waver even if nation & country perish.

4) Caught up in the vicious circle of money economics, morals out of the window, will sadly resort to anything for sheer survival.

5) Hell-bent on money greed, ready for any crime or treason, appearing respectable in high positions but barbaric to the core.

6) SL-Tamil communal cliques will continue threats until we uphold our national sovereignty.

7) Those intermarried with non indigenous minorities and affiliated with them shifted loyalties against the Hela Nation and culture.

No Tamil national rights within National Heladiva

A non indigenous minority who have their country of national origin elsewhere but settled in a host national country, become common national citizens of the host nation. As non indigenous minority Tamils’ national origin is Tamil Nadu but have now become Heladiva citizens, they too are common citizens of the Hela nation. Their indigenous Tamilness is ONLY their private matter and should not be any threat to the host nation, given them permanent abode. If Tamil national citizenship is required the only choice they have is to return to Tamil Nadu. Tamils as an entity always tried to grab our tiny sovereign national Island Country demonstrating total lack of scruples and human refinement. The Tamil communal cliques brainwashed their docile community to the notion that Tamil homeland is Heladiva while Tamil Nadu is glaring over as the Tamil country. Let us examine the malicious nature of this Tamil attitude. As the Dravida culture is grossly bloodthirsty and exploitative its product cannot be different. Highly ancient Hela nation evolved with refined humanity in harmony with nature, who built a unique hydro civilisation along with human hospitality. The benevolent attitude of the Hela people was perceived by the Tamils as folly as they knew no better with their said upbringing. Until we realise the Tamil psyche and respond to them in the medium they understand – we cannot expect peace. Throughout the pages of history non interfering non intruding Hela nation, we tolerated much external forces but when reached beyond limits we always had the strength to perform defence exercises against injustice.

Forward path of Hela Nationality

Power divides into two forms good power and bad power. Today world is dominated by bad power.Westerner and global Tamil entity are after the blood of our tiny nation. Their vision is conspiracy and exploitation. We need to understand this and maintain strength in upholding our national sovereignty in governance. Enhance economy, uphold law and order, remove corruption and march inclusive of all minorities as unitary Hela citizens.

Mass migration threatens world’s national diversity

No country in the world has a pure blooded nation or race. Mankind often migrates and merges mentally and physically with the host nation. This to a certain extent enhances the biological infrastructure of a nation. But if this mixing exceeds the apparent limits – that nation can disintegrate and the country is vulnerable to invasion. The natural heritage of nation, country, culture and the national world of each country offers richness of diversity to the fabric of world heritage, which is at stake due to mass migration. Heladiva and Britain are near casualties to this disturbing eventuality. It is the proportion of settler non indigenous minorities has exceeded its safe limit. However, we are tabooed to discuss these in the open at our peril.

The attempted Tamil invasive terror and genocide against the Hela nation was the impact of mass migration of Tamils from Tamil Nadu national origin to Heladiva. About 50 Muslim countries arisen in the world due to mass Muslim migration, as many of these countries belonged to other nations but suffered invasion by migration. To become angered or threaten minorities is not the solution but face with wisdom and strategy. For our individual and common sustenance, upholding our national sovereignty with the strictest defence strategies is paramount for our survival. First step is to network the dispersed Hela nation by bringing national goodwill to the fore. One important step is to refrain from marital contracts with minorities. If this happens by chance, every effort should be made to Helanise the minority partners.

Those have already intermarried should by common decency learn to accept the Island Country is Hela Country and accept the Hela nationality. Similarly, if we settle in a host country, it is our refined humanity we should merge with the host nation and practise our foreign culture only in private without threatening the host nation. This is a contribution to world peace and that mind has more power than genes.

Request

As we are a small nation, to sustain, defend the island, progress, we need to muster power. This requests the dispersed Hela National Family to network in cohesion. As our differing opinions is a set back to this exercise, we can make a practical attempt for all to agree to a few common factors as an example below. This can help us pool our power, in spite of individual uniqueness and opinions:-

1) The Island Country identified as SL is the national Hela country of Heladiva.

2) Tamil Nadu (Tamil Country) is the Tamil national country.

3) Like in other host countries, the non indigenous Hela-Tamils are entitled to human rights and Hela National Citizenship rights. Any demand for “Tamil national rights”, they have to return to Tamil Nadu.

Final decision is - Is it justifiable for Hela-Tamils and other minorities in Heladiva, who already have their national countries to merge with the Hela national Sovereignty? Or, is it justifiable for more foreign national rights and us to be vulnerable to invasion and extinction?

Authors of the Article: Anura Senenviratna, Dr MB Ranatunga, Asanka Haradasa, Sumith Silva, Sapumal Watteaarachchige, Ira Mediwake, Ranjith Wijetunge, Dhanapala Godagangdeni.